Checked

Extra Credit:

Explanations of One Man’s Movements In the Future of Photography

            On 26 January 2012, photographer and Professor Jordan Tate spoke at Boise State University about his thoughts on the present and future prospects for photography as an art form. During his talk, he addresses the issue that some critics believe photography is a dead art because of the advances in technology and computer manipulation of images. Quoting Roland Barthes that photography is an active force, Tate argues that for those same reasons photography is a viable and ever expanding area of artistic expression, limited only by the artist’s own conception of what photography as Art means.

            Working from a characterization for Meta Photography: service to photography, Tate compares current technologies to Steve Austin: The Six Million Dollar Man in regards to the potentials that are available in the art form, but many practitioners are like Luke Skywalker, meaning they have a bionic hand but don’t explore the potential abilities it presents. Tate calls this the Crushing Rocks principle.  From this base work Tate goes on to discuss his current processes and areas of work, much of which was either beyond my comprehension or didn’t have a direct application to my own work, mostly comprehension.
            As to what I got out of the experience, Tate broadens the parameters of photography to incorporating any medium that allows exact reproductions of the original work, such as molds and lithographs was enlightening. This inclusion helped me to come closer to rectifying my own definition of Art as a whole. I originally (and still do) agreed with Professor Anne Price of the Drama Department at Boise State. Price teaches that Art is deliberate and reflects the human experience. I also agree with the Dictionary of the History of Ideas’ assertion that it should “appeal to emotion as well as to mind”. Somewhere along the way I came to also consider Art as being comprised of one-of-a-kind pieces and capable of lasting indefinitely as being part of the definition (such as surviving Greek and Egyptian artifacts), which left mass and reproducible objects and auto-destructive art in an ambiguous state.
          Even as my understanding of Art expanded and matured, this idea about the singularity and deathless sustainability of Art was never fully rectified. I first tried filing it as Pop Art which has been validated by Professor Price’s suggestion of “Elitist Culture” and “Popular Culture” as categories to place works of Art with differing characteristics. Tate’s encompassing view of photography is one more piece toward understanding what Art is, and that alone made the evening worthwhile.

Entry Wk 3.1

Little Boys Go to War
Loom-knit objects from wire; such as hats, mittens, and stockings. Maybe display as being worn by knitted wool or sewn silk mannequin. (Inspiration= while working with 30 gage wire)

Of Hippies and Gypsies
Make simple furniture (shaker or mission?). Carve a border, similar to an ornate frame, and use the remaining surface as a picture plane to either draw or paint on. (Inspiration= while visiting galleries, Downtown Boise)